linux-raid.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: "Michał Przyłuski" <mikylie@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Rabbitson <rabbit+list@rabbit.us>, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Raid6 write performance
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 12:35:41 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49AAF19D.8050502@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6c4602af0903011112o440d7a4i22a24b58ada58865@mail.gmail.com>

Michał Przyłuski wrote:
> 
> I'm afraid that might be incorrect.
> 
> Let's assume we want to write 100MB of data onto a 4 drive raid6.
> Let's divide 100MB of data into two parts, say A and B, each 50MB big.
> Writing the data on the raid, would mean writing:
> * A on disk1
> * B on disk2
> * XOR(A,B) on disk3
> * Q(A,B) on disk4
> That is actually assuming 50MB chunk, and whole chunk writes, etc.
> Each of written portions would have been 50MB in size. That sounds
> reasonable to me, as with 2 data disks, only half of data has to be
> written on each. The fact that disks are really striped with data, XOR
> and Q doesn't change the image in terms of amount written.
> 
> I do hope I had understood the situation correctly, but I'll be ever
> happy to be proved wrong.
> 

Ah, sorry, yes you're of course right.  I was thinking about latency,
not throughput, for some idiotic reason.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  reply	other threads:[~2009-03-01 20:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-01-19  7:40 Raid6 write performance Peter Rabbitson
2009-01-19  8:10 ` thomas62186218
2009-01-19  9:07   ` NiftyFedora Mitch
2009-01-26 18:47     ` Bill Davidsen
2009-01-19 12:48   ` Keld Jørn Simonsen
2009-01-19 12:50     ` Peter Rabbitson
2009-01-19 10:37 ` Peter Rabbitson
2009-01-19 10:58   ` Bernd Schubert
2009-01-19 11:01     ` Peter Rabbitson
2009-01-19 11:08       ` Bernd Schubert
2009-02-28  1:04 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-03-01 19:12   ` Michał Przyłuski
2009-03-01 20:35     ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2009-03-01 19:19   ` Peter Rabbitson
2009-03-13 17:11     ` Bill Davidsen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=49AAF19D.8050502@zytor.com \
    --to=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikylie@gmail.com \
    --cc=rabbit+list@rabbit.us \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).